AN UNLIKELY VOICE MUST BE SUPPORTED
By Avedis Kevorkian

AZG Armenian Daily
30/06/2009

Armenian Genocide

It isn’t often that the Armenians have the opportunity to influence
a court case that concerns the Armenian Genocide and in which no
Armenian is involved.

Just such an opportunity has now arisen and it is incumbent on
Armenians to get involved-at the very least, to submit amicus curiae
[friend of the court] briefs in support of the defendant.

The defendant in this case is an unlikely one and is being sued by
someone who is among the leading denialists of the Armenian Genocide.

Known for its studies of hate groups, the Southern Poverty Law Center
(SPLC) published an article, "State of Denial," last year, in which
it criticized Guenter Lewy, saying that "Lewy is one of the most
active members of a network of American scholars, influence peddlers
and website operator, financed by hundreds of thousand of dollars
each year from the government of Turkey, who promote the denial of
the Armenian Genocide." The other statement to which Lewy objects,
in his lawsuit, says, "Lewy makes similar revisionist claims in
his 2005 book The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed
Genocide,’ and in frequent lectures at university campuses across the
country. . . . Revisionist historians who conjure doubt about the
Armenian genocide and are paid by the Turkish government provided
politicians with the intellectual cover they needed to claim they
were refusing to dictate history rather than caving in to a foreign
government’s present-day interests."

Charging the SPLC with defamation, Lewy is reported to be seeking
millions of dollars, claiming the statements "are defamatory because
they falsely impute to Plaintiff academic corruption, fraud and
deceit. . . ." As a result of the accusations, the suit says that Lewy
has had his "scholarly credibility" hurt and has lost book sales and
speaking engagements.

There is no need to go into more detail, since most Armenians know–or
should know-Lewy’s denialist views.

This lawsuit is somewhat reminiscent of the case brought by David
Irving against Deborah Lipstadt, in 1996, in London, because she
had said some things about Irving and his denial of the Genocide of
the Jews, in World War Two. He, too, sued. However, in that case,
Jews from around the world rallied to Lipstadt’s cause. One famous
Hollywood personality sent the Lipstadt Defense Fund a check for
$750,000 with a note "more if you need it."

(I remarked at the time, if an Armenian found himself in the same
situation as Lipstadt, would any Armenian send a check for $750,000,
or $75,000, or $7500, or $750, or $75, or $7.50? We know the answer
to that.) The SPLC is always in need of money in its fight for
the good cause, but whether or not the SPLC is seeking funds in its
defense of the lawsuit, I know it won’t get it from the Armenians,
however, there is no reason why our "advocacy" groups in Washington,
for instance, should not get involved with the "friend of the court"
briefs. There is no reason why other Armenian organizations should not
get involved, similarly. There is no reason why individual Armenians
should not get involved.

We know that when push comes to shove, the lip-service politicians
aren’t worth a damn, else I would suggest that they be contacted
to also act in support of the SPLC’s statements about Lewy and his
"scholarship."

Someone should send a copy of the statement by the International
Association of Genocide Scholars, and a copy of the report from
the International Center for Transitional Justice to the court–or,
at least, to the SPLC.

We Armenians must not assume that the SPLC will have the kinds of
facts and information we know exists. The lawyers among us should know
what is needed and how that "what" can and should be presented. But,
individual Armenians should also show their support of the SPLC.

Lewy is being supported, in his lawsuit by the Turkish American Legal
Defense Fund, and his lawyer is Bruce Fein who, himself, has written
extensively denying the Armenian Genocide.

By the way, for those with short memories, David Irving lost his case,
and the judge possibly went beyond the bounds of decorum by saying
some nasty things about Irving.